hopes were entertained of carrying the state again, though the party had lost the Legislature the year before, and very recently the municipal election in Baltimore.

The pro-slavery sentiment of the state was naturally inclined to favor the radical wing of the Democratic party, and to accept the advanced views enunciated by Maryland's gifted son, Roger B. Taney in the Dred Scott case. Consequently Douglas polled less than six thousand votes in the state. Lincoln did not receive half of this number. Baltimore furnished about a half of the entire Republican vote; Allegany county about one-fourth. The northern counties and those of the western part of the state furnished nearly all of the remainder. Several counties gave the Republican candidate only one vote, and two none at all. The campaign had been an exciting one, and resulted in the selection of Breckenridge electors by a small plurality." The indefinable feeling of uneasiness and alarm which sprang up in the Southern states as a result of the election of Lincoln was very noticeable in Maryland. The accession to power of the "Black Republican Party" and the plans, according to rumor, of the "Abolitionists" were met by inflammatory utterances throughout the South. George William Brown, who though elected as a reform candidate in opposition to the Americans, yet had zealously supported Bell and Everett, subsequently spoke in his inaugural address, as Mayor of Baltimore, of this uneasiness, but insisted that the election of Lincoln presented no just cause for disruption. "The policy of Maryland," he said, "is to adhere to the Union." Yet even before November 20, at least two of the newspapers of the state, the Centreville Advocate and the Patapsco Enterprise, had shown decided leanings toward secession.

99 15

16

In the dissatisfaction which prevailed generally in Mary

14

The Sun of November 24, 1860, gives as official: Breckenridge, 42,482; Bell, 41,760; Douglas, 5,966; Lincoln, 2,294.

15 Baltimore American, November 13, 1860.

land with the election of Lincoln, Hicks shared, and looked with gloomy forebodings upon the result of the elevation to power of that party which was so strongly anti-slavery. However, it is quite certain that he was not at this time in favor of the use of force to prevent Lincoln's inauguration, as has been frequently stated. The letter written by him to E. H. Webster on March 9, 1860, has been cited freely as damaging evidence. The letter is best regarded as an imprudent attempt at humor between a governor of a state and an intimate friend. Undoubtedly, the matter would never have come up for discussion if the opponents of Hicks, after the war had begun, had not seized this opportunity of trying to show inconsistency in his course."

17 Speech of Hicks in United States Senate on February 28, 1863, and correspondence between Hicks and Webster (MS.).

Hon. E. H. Webster.

State of Maryland, Executive Chamber,
Annapolis, November 9, 1860.

My Dear Sir:-I have pleasure in acknowledging receipt of your favor introducing a very clever gentleman to my acquaintance (though a Democrat). I regret to say that we have at this time no arms on hand to distribute, but assure you at the earliest possible moment your company shall have arms; they have complied with all required of them on your part. We have some delay in consequence of contracts with Georgia and Alabama ahead of us, and we expect at an early date an additional supply, and of the first received your people shall be furnished. Will they be good men to send out to kill Lincoln and his men? If not, I suppose the arms would be better sent South. How does the late election sit with you? 'Tis too bad. Harford nothing to reproach herself for.

Your obedient servant,

THOMAS H. HICKS.

The letter was published frequently during the year after it was written.

CHAPTER III.

PETITIONS URGING THE ASSEMBLING OF THE LEGISLATURE.

As soon as the people of the state had recovered somewhat from the uncertain feeling of bewilderment which followed the announcement of the result of the election, petitions began to pour in upon Hicks. Some of these urged a convening of the Legislature in special session; the others opposed any such course. By the former, no definite line or lines of policy seem to have been agreed upon as to what the Legislature should do after being assembled. In the main, however, a common desire was expressed that this body should take suitable steps to preserve peace in the state, and to guard the honor and welfare of Maryland if these should be imperiled. The people of Maryland by a vast majority were willing to unite with the states further South in protesting strenuously against the failures to execute the Fugitive Slave Laws. They saw in the election of Lincoln a blow which threatened not only the extension of slavery, but also the formal protection of that institution by the highest authorities in the land. The disunion movement in the South was anxiously watched, and a feverish desire prevailed that the state through its legal authorities should take some formal action in the crisis; preferably to make some attempt to stay the hand of disunion, but at the same time to secure from the incoming administration some guaranty for the protection of slavery-for at this time the secession of Maryland was desired by only a small portion of the inhabitants. A somewhat larger portion looked upon it as a final resort. The question of secession of the state was not considered, in the main, by the peti

tions which were presented, nor indeed by the writings and speeches of the month following the election. Later, when the states in the South began to pass ordinances of this nature, the feeling that Maryland should break from the Union grew stronger.

On the 27th of November, a memorial signed by ExGovernor Pratt, Sprigg Harwood, and other prominent citizens, was presented to Hicks, requesting him to summon the Legislature in special session immediately, in view of the gravity of the situation. On November 27 he replied, making his first public utterance on the subject. He contended that a session of the Legislature would only increase the excitement, then becoming too prevalent in Maryland. He expressed his entire sympathy with the South for the wrongs it claimed to endure, and his indignation at the refusal of the Northern people to enforce the provision of the Fugitive Slave laws. The Governor likewise made the very pointed suggestion that it would be better for the people to await the policy of the incoming administration before rushing to conclusions as to what would probably be done. He expressed his belief that in spite of the extreme views of some of the prominent Republicans, on the whole, the people of the North were too conservative to urge radical measures against slavery. The low condition of the finances of the state and the probable expenses of an extra session were dwelt upon. In this letter and in later utterances Hicks did not claim to follow the dictates of his own judgment alone, but insisted that the people of the state as a whole were opposed to the calling of the Legislature.'

From this time on mass-meetings and similar gatherings were held all over the state. A consideration of the accounts of these meetings does not lead to very satisfactory conclusions. Correspondents of Governor Hicks and

'Letter to Pratt was published in the Baltimore American, November 29, 1860, and exists in manuscript.

of the newspapers show opinions so evidently biased, and make such contradictory statements, that attempts, even of a general nature, to form estimates of the numerical strength of the adherents of the different parties in the state are extremely hazardous. On the whole, the assertion may be made that at this period a large majority of these meetings adopted resolutions which expressed strong hopes of seeing Maryland remain in the Union, while it would seem that the larger number of them desired a session of the Legislature." The resolutions adopted in the western part of the state abound in protestations of devotion to the Union. In the southern part of Maryland the resolutions passed are mainly taken up with a recital of wrongs which the South was said to endure. As an instance of the intense feeling in that section, a meeting which was held at Beantown, Charles county, requested all the Republicans who had voted for Lincoln to leave the county by January 1, 1861. No general exodus was necessary to gratify this "request," since the entire number of persons in the entire country who had incurred displeasure by their choice for President was only six.

The Annapolis Gazette was generally believed to be the organ of Hicks, though the latter denied that any paper could claim its utterances to be possessed of any official sanction from him. Still Hicks at times used this paper as his mouthpiece, and its columns were eagerly watched to detect some evidence that he was weakening in his determination not to call the Legislature together.

On December 5, 1860, Hicks wrote to Captain Contee, of Prince George's county, in reply to a letter in which

No absolute accuracy is claimed for this statement. Even if true, it proves but little, for at this time the opponents of the Legislature were not very active.

3

Baltimore American, December 3, 1860; Baltimore Sun, November 24, 1860.

Letter to Legrand from Hicks (MS.).